Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

MP questions Hoon over Iraq crash

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

MP questions Hoon over Iraq crash

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 20th Jan 2004, 20:08
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MP questions Hoon over Iraq crash

from BBC Online...

MP questions Hoon over Iraq crash


Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon is facing questions over claims a helicopter crash in Iraq might have been avoided if the pilots had worn night goggles.

Liberal Democrat MP Paul Tyler is tabling questions on the collision of the two Navy helicopters last year.

It comes after the widow of a soldier killed in Iraq without body armour urged Mr Hoon to consider his position.

The Ministry of Defence says night vision goggles are not standard issue for Sea King helicopter pilots.

Amazement

Seven aircrew based at the Navy's Culdrose air station in Cornwall were killed when the two helicopters collided in mid-air in the Gulf last March.

The helicopters had been operating from HMS Ark Royal.

A board of inquiry last June said that had one of the helicopters' pilots been wearing night vision goggles the crash might have been avoided.

Mr Tyler said he was "amazed" the helicopter pilots had not been wearing night vision goggles.

He told BBC News Online: "Potentially, this is a very damaging extra bit of evidence about inadequate provision of equipment."

The Lib Dem frontbencher accompanied Samantha Roberts to her meeting with Mr Hoon on Monday about why her husband Steve died in Iraq after handing over his flak jacket to another unit.


'Not standard issue'

The Independent on Sunday newspaper this week said senior Navy officers had told several families at a private meeting last June that flying conditions would have been "poor" at the time of the crash.

A Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman said the board of inquiry had recommended the government look at providing Sea King pilots with night vision goggles.

The aircraft were not normally fitted for pilots using the goggles - which needed the cockpit to be changed, he said.

Night vision goggles were designed for low-level flying and had never been envisaged for the high-altitude surveillance role performed by the Sea Kings.

"The visibility at the time certainly was not poor, it was reduced but not unusual and certainly far better than conditions we have often flown in before," said the spokesman.

Aircraft flying towards the Ark Royal could see the ship from five miles away, he added.

Taking responsibility

Mr Hoon has rejected calls for his resignation over the death of Sergeant Steve Roberts but says he is sorry he did not have enhanced body armour.

After her meeting with the minister, Mrs Roberts branded as "disgraceful" her treatment by the MoD as she tried to get the facts about why her husband did not have the life-saving equipment.

"I think he should consider his position very seriously because I feel that someone is responsible... and he has not directly accepted responsibility," she told reporters after the meeting in Whitehall.

Mr Hoon has invited her back for a third meeting when the investigation into Sgt Roberts' death is complete.

In a statement, the MoD said Mr Hoon had told the widow he had asked the MoD to examine whether the equipment could become "standard issue to all personnel".

He also asked the chain of command to "look again" at the way it keeps families informed as investigations proceed.
Rex 1100 is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2004, 22:56
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As with most accidents anything that breaks the chain of events leading to it could have prevented it: however, I do not believe that anyone in this instance can pin the blame fairly on lack of NVGs or on Buff Hoon.
soddim is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2004, 00:24
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tracy Island
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The pertinent question to be asked is, whether the equipment issued to members of the British Armed forces, whilst engaged in combat operations, compatibile with our NATO allies in terms of protection and efficacy. Judging by our experiences during GW2 I would suspect not.
FEBA is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2004, 01:25
  #4 (permalink)  

TAC Int Bloke
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The pertinent question to be asked is, whether the equipment issued to members of the British Armed forces, whilst engaged in combat operations, compatibile with our NATO allies in terms of protection and efficacy. Judging by our experiences during GW2 I would suspect not.
Then Sir, I would hazard a guess that you've never worked with the Canadian/French/Spanish etc Airforces. NATO forces, by and large, are 'hanging out of their @rses' when it comes to kit, even more so than us

Regards

-Nick
Maple 01 is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2004, 04:27
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tracy Island
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maple 01
Thanks for the reply though I don't understand it. When I was in we wore Canadian kit for arctic warfare.
My question was partially aimed at the accusation that the lack of NVG may have contributed to the SK mid air. The protection of body armour may well have saved the life of Sgt Roberts. I suspect that there's a political answer to this. Will the outcome of this equip us with the right kit? I doubt it, history proves it.
FEBA is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2004, 04:35
  #6 (permalink)  

TAC Int Bloke
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All I was trying to say is it's all relative, the Yanks have the best kit and make us look 'third world', on the other hand other of our glorious NATO allies have even greater problems than us with most stuff, I'll grant you that in specific cases, such as Canadian CW gear they may fair better, but generally, in my experience, we're better off than them.....don't get me started on French conscripts and their kit....

Regards

-Nick
Maple 01 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.